[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Opinion on ordering of writel vs. stores to RAM

On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> >
> > although it's quite possible that (a) never makes any sense at all.
> Do you mean (b) never makes sense?


> I suspect the best thing at this point is to move the sync in writeX()
> before the store, as you suggest, and add an "eieio" before the load
> in readX(). That does mean that we are then relying on driver writers
> putting in the mmiowb() between a writeX() and a spin_unlock, but at
> least that is documented.

Yeah, that sounds reasonable.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.091 / U:3.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site